Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Mike Gapes (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 8 December 2005. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Terrorism (Foreign Policy Aspects).


Terrorism (Foreign Policy Aspects)

: No. I am short of time, and I wish to say something about Israel, the west bank and Gaza before I conclude. I am conscious that many hon. Members wish to speak so I do not wish to take any more interventions at the moment. Last week, some Foreign Affairs Committee members visited Israel, Gaza and the west bank, while other members visited Saudi Arabia and the Emirates. I have no doubt that other hon. Members will comment on that. I wish to highlight the massive political changes that have taken place. Israel has been hit by something of a political earthquake in the last three weeks. First, we saw 82-year-old Nobel prize-winner Shimon Peres replaced as leader of the Labour party by radical left-wing trade union leader Amir Peretz. Secondly, Ariel Sharon withdrew from Likud, taking 14 Likud MPs with him to form a new centre party, Kadima, with three Labour MPs. Following that, Mr. Peres announced that he was leaving Labour after 60 years to support Mr. Sharon, although not to join his party. That political realignment is of enormous significance. There will be Palestinian elections to the legislative council on 25 January. The Israelis have elections planned for 28 March, which will clearly be greatly influenced by what happens beforehand in the Palestinian process. In virtually all the primaries for the Fatah candidates, radical people associated with the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade are topping the polls. In Jenin, Nablus, Ramallah—where Marwan Barghouti got 96 per cent. of the vote—and East Jerusalem, the younger guard of more radical people, who are not necessarily supported by or closely associated with Abu Mazen and the older leadership, is winning support. In Gaza, Hamas is very strong. The primaries for Fatah candidates were cancelled because of fighting between different Fatah factions, but Hamas is expected to get between 25 and 30 per cent. of the vote and could win a majority. Israel says that it will not negotiate with a Palestinian Government including Hamas. The question is where will we be in the future? I had not been in the west bank, Gaza or Israel for several years and I had not seen the separation fence—the barrier, the wall—but my perception is that Ariel Sharon is not the man who will negotiate a final status agreement with the Palestinians. Following the unilateral disengagement from Gaza, he is set on unilaterally defining the borders of the Jewish state. My perception, from discussions with Israelis and Palestinians last week, is that he will withdraw from areas east of the separation barrier and abandon the settlements there, as happened in Gaza. He will then consolidate behind the settlement blocks to the east of Jerusalem that are inside the fence—the wall, the barrier. He will consolidate the state, based on greater Jerusalem and a significant percentage—perhaps 7 or 8 per cent.—of the west bank, which will include 74 per cent. of the settlers. As a result, Palestinians in East Jerusalem will be enclosed within the wall. Palestinians in the west bank will be separated from their families and their places of work outside the wall. A few years ago, 150,000 people from the Palestinian territories worked in Israel, but the figure is now a few thousand, and the position of the Israeli Government is that no Palestinians will be working there by 2008. That will cause huge economic problems and add to the effects, which we saw, of the road blocks, the closures and the security measures that cover vast areas of the west bank. We were told—I say this as someone who has always supported the two-states position and always believed that the Israelis have a right to defend themselves from attack and suicide terror—that it used to take one hour to travel by road from Hebron in the south to Ramallah, north of Jerusalem; it now takes an average of three hours. The disruption caused by the conflict, the self-imposed folly of the second intifada and its consequences, and the reaction of the Israelis, who have destroyed so many economic and political possibilities, have lead to great poverty and hardship among Palestinians. We are seeing a consequence of that in a cycle of radicalisation among Palestinians. My message, having been there last week, is not a very optimistic one for those of us who believe in negotiation, dialogue and processes. However, one state cannot impose a two-state solution. Unilateralism is not enough, and at some point, with the engagement of the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, who played such an important role in getting the Rafah border crossing agreement, the American Administration must get far more engaged with the support of the European Union, the Russians, the UN, and the rest of the Quartet, to work for a comprehensive two-state solution in the middle east. I should like to conclude my introduction of the report. We covered other areas, such as Afghanistan, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and other matters, but in the time available, it is clearly not possible to go into detail about all of those. I look forward to the Minister's response.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
440 c328-9WH 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Broadcasting Human rights Iraq Internet Foreign policy Terrorism USA Israel Palestine Syria
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk